Draft OpenID v.Next Discovery working group charter

John Bradley john.bradley at wingaa.com
Wed Apr 14 23:17:18 UTC 2010


Shade,

I think that your characterization is true of the XRD 1.0 spec.

XRI as used in XDI is a structured identifier format that allows one identifier to be specified in the context of another.
This allows for XDI to make statements about a statement.   
So there is a RDF/SPARQL like functionality built on XRI identifiers in XDI.  (Not directly relevant to openID)

That was the main design goal for XRI.  

XRI resolution happens to use a chain of XRD documents to resolve an XRI identifier.

Some people strongly object to there being a well known root for XRI operated as a commercial service.

However XRI can be used with private roots or with URL as the first subsegment.

There were three parts to the XRI 2.0 spec.
1. The Document format  (Currently XRD 1.0)
2. The structured identifier.  (opposed by some because it created a new namespace equivalent to acct:)
3. The resolution protocol.  (opposed due to the perception of a commercial money grab)

Some of the criticism may be warranted.  Though probably not all that has been heaped on XRI.

The history of XRI is probably not that interesting,  and not directly relevant to the discovery charter.

Shade,  is there specific language that you would like in the charter?

Regards
John B.

On 2010-04-14, at 6:50 PM, SitG Admin wrote:

>> unnecessary fragmentation of the naming space.
> 
> Could be. I'm only interested in it myself for the access to *other* namespaces.
> 
>> Describing it as 'moving forward' as if it was a train that could pull
>> OpenID in its wake is optimistic in the extreme.
> 
> Try reading my post again, this time reading that paranthetical bit in the context of its preceding paragraph (about work on different trust systems proceeding independently, without being held back by a lack of success in any other), instead of OpenID as a whole not succeeding.
> 
>> A more realistic
>> assessment is that XRI is essentially dead for all purposes and OpenID
>> is the only remaining chance for resurrection.
> 
> I see uses for XRI outside of OpenID - but, then again, perhaps I'm missing what XRI is "really" about, with my narrow-minded interest in the compatibility/interop possibilities.
> 
>> is going to be any different to UDDI, RealNames, X.500, AOL corporate
>> names or any of the other directory schemes that have come and gone.
> 
> I agree that XRI is related to OpenID, but I don't think they're connected; OpenID is an authentication encapsulation mechanism (limited to its own intrinsic security), XRI is a directory encapsulation mechanism (meant to be independent of the directory schema used to access it).
> 
> Of course, if I'm wrong, I should be corrected - so, Drummond? :)
> 
> -Shade
> _______________________________________________
> specs mailing list
> specs at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs



More information about the specs mailing list